Roni, thanks for your review. Al, thanks for your response. I entered a DISCUSS
ballot to get the registration policy clarified.
Alissa
> On Nov 1, 2019, at 11:54 AM, Roni Even (A) wrote:
>
> Hi Al,
> I saw that IANA was consulted during the work.
> I was wondering what will be the actual tex
Elwyn, thanks for your review. I entered a No Objection ballot and requested a
response to your review.
Alissa
> On Oct 28, 2019, at 7:30 PM, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Elwyn Davies
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.
Joel, thanks for your review. Al, thanks for your response. I entered a No
Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Nov 3, 2019, at 4:00 PM, Joel Halpern Direct
> wrote:
>
> Thanks Al. I presumed all the ducks were in a row, but thought I should ask
> to be certain.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 11/3/20
Hi Alissa,
Section 10.1 say:
Registration Procedure: Specification Required
What else do you think is needed?
Mirja
> On 4. Dec 2019, at 17:15, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>
> Roni, thanks for your review. Al, thanks for your response. I entered a
> DISCUSS ballot to get the registration policy
Brian, thanks for your review. Martin, thanks for your response. I entered a No
Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Oct 21, 2019, at 3:37 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Brian Carpenter via Datatracker mailto:nore...@ietf.org>>
> wrote:
>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
>> Review result: Ready
Brian, thanks for your review. Puneet, thanks for your response and for
updating the draft accordingly. I entered a No Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Sep 18, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Puneet Sood
> wrote:
>
> NOTE: Responding to the TTL concerns raised in multiple threads
> (thanks Viktor Dukhovni,
Roni, thanks for your review. Jim, thanks for your response. I entered a No
Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Nov 25, 2019, at 10:40 PM, Jim Schaad wrote:
>
> Fixed
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Roni Even via Datatracker
> Sent: Saturday, November 9, 2019 11:14 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.o
Meral, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS ballot with a question about
the option class types.
Alissa
> On Nov 9, 2019, at 3:08 PM, Meral Shirazipour
> wrote:
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents
Hi Alyssa,
Although we originally chose Expert Review (at IANA's request),
it seems the best policy choice is Specification Required
(which includes Expert Review), and IANA agreed at IETF-106.
We are in the process of finding and updating any stray instances
of the old policy left behind...
Hi Mirja,
> On Dec 4, 2019, at 11:35 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
>
> Hi Alissa,
>
> Section 10.1 say:
>
> Registration Procedure: Specification Required
>
> What else do you think is needed?
What I put in my ballot:
"I'm confused about what the registration policy is for metrics in the new
Hi Theresa,
I will address all your comments in the next revision of the draft. Please see
inline for more responses.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Juniper Business Use Only
> -Original Message-
> From: Theresa Enghardt via Datatracker
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 3:12 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf
Hi Alissa,
I have responded to the comments and will address them in the next version of
the document.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Juniper Business Use Only
> -Original Message-
> From: Alissa Cooper
> Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 11:52 PM
> To: Theresa Enghardt
> Cc: General Area Review Tea
Theresa, thanks for your review. I entered a No Objection ballot supporting
Roman’s and Benjamin’s DISCUSS ballots, which note the items you mention below
about the security considerations and IPv6, respectively.
Alissa
> On Sep 25, 2019, at 3:50 AM, Theresa Enghardt via Datatracker
> wrote:
Elwyn:
Thanks for the review. I missed the review when you posted it, but I saw
Alissa's recent reply to it.
> Reviewer: Elwyn Davies
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being p
Reviewer: Suhas Nandakumar
Review result: Ready with Nits
Summary: The document is a well written summary and covers the ideas clearly.
I don't have major concerns but do have few minor concerns and Nits that might
help with some clarifications
Major issues: None
Minor issues:
1. Section 7.2 pa
Suhas, thanks for your review. I entered an Abstain ballot as I’m unclear on
the archival value of this document. I did request a response to your review
though.
Alissa
> On Dec 4, 2019, at 3:09 PM, Suhas Nandakumar via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Suhas Nandakumar
> Review result: Re
16 matches
Mail list logo
